Example :　

①I hypothesized that the participants would be most likely to cheat in the 20 dollar reward group.②However, I did not find a significant difference between the different reward levels, which could either mean that the type of reward did not affect the likelihood of cheating or that the sample size was not large enough to yield significant results.　

③The pattern that emerged between participants' self-reports of cheating behaviors and their dishonesty ratings revealed that participants were willing to say that behaviors in which they had not engaged were "extremely wrong, 'but behaviors in which they had engaged were rated as “not wrong" or "somewhat wrong."④ It could be that the participants were trying to justify their behaviors by saying that they only engaged in the more acceptable types of cheating and never took part in anything that was really dishonest.

  ⑤ Participants who cheated on the puzzle task also had higher self-efficacy scores, which means that they feel like they have more control over their success.⑥ Perhaps participants who have higher levels of self-efficacy are more confident that they will succeed. (7)The puzzle task in this experiment, however, was designed so that the participants could not successfully solve all of the puzzles without cheating.⑧ Refusing to fail such a simple task, they decided cheating was an acceptable tactic for success.

⑨ This study contained only 34 participants, hence it is important to note that all of these findings should be approached with caution.⑩ Further investigation is necessary in order to strengthen the significance of the findings.⑪ However, the findings of this study could be the first steps to uncovering the motivations behind academic dishonesty.⑫ A suggestion for future research is closer examination of the differences in academic motivations of people who cheat and those who do not.